“Literacy, Discourse, and Linguistics,” James Gee

IWA: 3/20/13

Summary: In his article, “Literacy, Discourse, and Linguistics,” James Gee attempts to tell his audience his viewpoint on what a discourse community is. He argues that a person is really only part of one discourse community and if they claim to belong to more than one they are essentially lying because people can only dedicate their time fully to one.

Synthesis: Gee’s article is like Swales piece in that they both discuss discourses. Granted they discuss them in opposite ways but they still discuss them.

QD 2: Basically what Gee means is that in order to belong to a discourse community you not only have to walk the walk but talk the talk so to speak. You have to speak the way your discourse community does and dress similar to them too.

QD 4: A primary discourse is the one people use initially to make sense of the world. Secondary discourse is basically a public place. It’s a place where you interact with people because you have to (like a grocery store) even if you don’t belong to that discourse. The dominant discourse is the secondary discourse only you get benefits (aka a job). The non dominant discourse is a secondary discourse that would have a facebook page or twitter you follow but that’s about the most interaction you have with them.

QD 7: Essentially he’s saying older members of a discourse have to test their new members as to whether or not they will fit in with the group. An example would be any campus group that invites in freshmen. They have to see whether or not they will be able to fit in with their rules, “customs,” activities, etc.

QD 10: He defines enculturation as basically an apprenticeship where newer members of a group learn how to “fit in” with their new found group.

QD 11: Metaknowledge is basically knowledge about knowledge. Gee believes it is important because it helps us express ourselves more easily with a discourse.

QD 13: It’s hard to become a part of a group if you don’t know anybody in it because you won’t be able to figure out what is “acceptable” in the group as easily. The friends you make within the group aid you the most but oftentimes you do feel like a “pretender” if you don’t typically act the way they do. Sometimes you become what you’re not.

AE 1: I’d write a conversation between them but I feel like eventually what would be said would become too violent to be posted on a blog. The two have very different ideas about a discourse community. Gee believes you can truly be a part of one and Swales says you can be part of many. The only thing they could agree on is that we are part of a discourse community and that there are such things as discourse communities.

AE 4: You can navigate between these discourses by essentially being yourself. To me if you are part of a discourse community you should be in your natural environment and not have to pretend to be something you’re not. So I guess I never have to “dodge and weave” to become a different person. I’m me. And if a group doesn’t like it then I don’t take part in it.

MM: My feelings haven’t changed after reading Gee because I think he is wrong. I believe we can be part of several discourses and shouldn’t have to “force” ourselves to fit in. Honestly, I probably won’t use anything he “taught” me in another setting because I like the way I am.

Afterthoughts: Gee ticks me off. I mean yeah we saw discourses in another light but I don’t agree with what he said at all. If anything it might help me use some “smart people” terms in my paper about a primary discourse and such.